M/S Shyam Traders vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The petitioners sought permission to withdraw the present writ petition with a reservation of liberty to prefer an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The Court granted this permission, directing that the appellate authority should decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight months. The Court also stipulated that the issue of limitation would not come in the way if the appeal was preferred within the next four weeks. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of these directions. The Court did not decide the substantive issues raised regarding the legality of the Show Cause Notice, the Original Order, or the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s Shyam Traders and M/s Sandhya Stores, are challenging a Show Cause Notice dated July 1, 2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Customs (Preventive), Division Forbesganj. This notice alleged illegal import of 1257 Kg of Big Cardamom, valued at Rs. 20,11,200/-, seized on January 9, 2019. The goods were allegedly imported from a third country without valid documents through an unauthorized route, contravening provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The petitioners also challenge the consequential Original Order dated December 11, 2019, passed by the Joint Commissioner, Customs (Preventive), Patna, which confiscated the goods and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 13,07,280/- and a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/-. Further, they challenge the order dated November 27, 2020, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, CGST & CX, Patna, dismissing their appeals.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Show Cause Notice bearing no. VIII (10)-474/Import/18-19/5936-5939 dated 01.07.2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Customs (Prev.) Division Forbesganj, and the consequential Original Order dated 11.12.2019 passed by the Joint Commissioner, Customs (Prev.) Hqrs, Patna, are illegal, arbitrary, and without application of mind, particularly concerning the alleged illegal import of Big Cardamom and the imposition of confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty under Sections 111(b) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, read with Section 3(2) of the FTDR Act, 1992. 2. Whether the seizure of goods on 09.01.2019 and the initiation of proceedings were illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction. 3. Whether the order dated 27.11.2020 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, CGST & CX, Patna, dismissing the petitioners' appeals, is sustainable. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that the Show Cause Notice and the consequential orders were passed without application of mind, were illegal, arbitrary, whimsical, and wholly without justification. They also contended that the seizure of goods and initiation of proceedings were illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction. They sought quashing of all impugned orders and release of the seized goods. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the revenue or state.